PerformanceRiskValuationProfitabilityCashflowLiquidityESGRevenue & Geographic ExposureForecastFinancial GrowthIncome GrowthCashflow GrowthBalance Sheet Growth
205.24 - 207.41
139.95 - 221.69
4.54M / 6.54M (Avg.)
37.59 | 5.48
Steady, sustainable growth is a hallmark of high-quality businesses. Value investors watch these metrics to confirm that the company's fundamental performance aligns with—or outpaces—its current market valuation.
-2.70%
Both firms have declining sales. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry slump or new disruptive entrants.
-0.29%
Both firms have negative gross profit growth. Martin Whitman would question the sector’s viability or cyclical slump.
4.57%
EBIT growth below 50% of ON's 131.72%. Michael Burry would suspect deeper competitive or cost structure issues.
-1.29%
Negative operating income growth while ON is at 131.72%. Joel Greenblatt would press for urgent turnaround measures.
17.55%
Net income growth under 50% of ON's 90.00%. Michael Burry would suspect the firm is falling well behind a key competitor.
19.84%
EPS growth under 50% of ON's 90.03%. Michael Burry would suspect deeper structural issues or share dilution limiting per-share gains.
19.35%
Diluted EPS growth under 50% of ON's 90.03%. Michael Burry would worry about an eroding competitive position or excessive dilution.
-1.61%
Both firms reduce share counts. Martin Whitman would compare buyback intensity relative to free cash flow generation.
-1.70%
Both reduce diluted shares. Martin Whitman would review each firm’s ability to continue repurchases and manage option issuance.
-0.54%
Dividend reduction while ON stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s cash flow stability or capital allocation decisions.
102.12%
Positive OCF growth while ON is negative. John Neff would see this as a clear operational advantage vs. the competitor.
130.43%
FCF growth similar to ON's 135.91%. Walter Schloss would attribute it to parallel capital spending and operational models.
22.18%
10Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of ON's 118.29%. Michael Burry would suspect a lasting competitive disadvantage.
13.14%
5Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of ON's 43.47%. Michael Burry would suspect a significant competitive gap or product weakness.
-4.83%
Both firms have negative 3Y CAGR. Martin Whitman would wonder if the entire market segment is in short-term retreat.
303.61%
10Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x ON's 2.02%. David Dodd would check if a superior product mix or cost edge drives this outperformance.
136.80%
5Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x ON's 58.30%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm has better cost structures or brand premium boosting mid-term cash flow.
103.54%
Positive 3Y OCF/share CAGR while ON is negative. John Neff might see a big short-term edge in operational efficiency.
136.66%
Positive 10Y CAGR while ON is negative. John Neff might see a substantial advantage in bottom-line trajectory.
123.84%
Positive 5Y CAGR while ON is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong mid-term relative advantage.
41.81%
Positive short-term CAGR while ON is negative. John Neff would see a clear advantage in near-term profit trajectory.
3.34%
Below 50% of ON's 188.22%. Michael Burry would suspect poor capital allocation or persistent net losses eroding long-term equity build-up.
-15.44%
Negative 5Y equity/share growth while ON is at 110.88%. Joel Greenblatt sees the competitor building net worth while this firm loses ground.
-22.54%
Negative 3Y equity/share growth while ON is at 58.38%. Joel Greenblatt demands an urgent fix in capital structure or profitability vs. the competitor.
638.34%
Dividend/share CAGR of 638.34% while ON is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a slight advantage in stepping up payouts steadily.
162.46%
Dividend/share CAGR of 162.46% while ON is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor advantage in stepping up distributions, even modestly.
79.33%
3Y dividend/share CAGR of 79.33% while ON is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor positive difference that could attract dividend-focused investors.
-10.64%
Firm’s AR is declining while ON shows 2.36%. Joel Greenblatt sees stronger working capital efficiency if sales hold up.
6.64%
Inventory growth well above ON's 2.68%. Michael Burry suspects overshooting production or weaker sell-through vs. the competitor.
0.94%
Asset growth at 75-90% of ON's 1.14%. Bill Ackman suggests reviewing opportunities to match or surpass the competitor's asset expansion if profitable.
0.45%
50-75% of ON's 0.79%. Martin Whitman suspects weaker earnings or capital allocation vs. the competitor.
3.76%
Debt growth far above ON's 0.16%. Michael Burry fears the firm is taking on undue leverage vs. the competitor.
0.53%
We increase R&D while ON cuts. John Neff sees a short-term profit drag but a potential lead in future innovations.
-3.84%
Both reduce SG&A yoy. Martin Whitman sees a cost war or cyclical slowdown forcing overhead cuts.